The objective is to make Americans think that any criticism of Islamic texts that jihadis use to incite violence worldwide threatens and endangers Muslims at home who don’t approve of that violence in the first place.

Hooper cannily designs all this to obscure the real point: that people are suspicious of Islam because of jihad terror attacks — but not just because of them, but also because of the endless mau-mauing, intimidating, opposition to counter-terror efforts, claiming of victim status, faked hate crimes, smear campaigns against foes of jihad terror, and all the other things that make people suspicious of Hamas-linked CAIR and other Muslim organizations in the U.S.

No genuine attack on any innocent person, Muslim or otherwise, is ever justified. If Hamas-linked CAIR really wants to stop such attacks, it could do so by working sincerely to end the suspicions people have of Islam and Muslims — not with disingenuous “outreach” sessions designed to dispel “misconceptions” about Islam (i.e., spread more misconceptions about Islam, fool people into thinking it is a “Religion of Peace,” etc.), but by honestly working within Muslim communities and with law enforcement to root out jihadis and teach against the understanding of Islam that creates jihadis. Instead, Hamas-linked CAIR has opposed virtually every counter-terror measure that has ever been proposed, and one of its California chapters distributed a poster reading “Don’t talk to the FBI.”

You might wonder why Hamas-linked CAIR would do this if it wants to end “Islamophobia” (in the sense of suspicion of Islam) — surely Hooper, Awad and co. must know that those things increase such suspicion? Yes, I am sure they do — but in fact they want “Islamophobia” (both suspicion of Islam and attacks on peaceful Muslims) because they can use such attacks to claim victim status and the privileges that come with it, thus intimidating officials into thinking that surveillance of Islamic organizations is unjustified and endangers innocent people.

“These Islamophobes,” Hooper also asserted, “scour the Internet to highlight every act of violence or political instability that can be tied to Islam and Muslims.” At my website Jihad Watch, I chronicle Islamic jihad activity in the U.S. and around the world, and I never in ten years have had to “scour the Internet” to do so. On the contrary, there is so much jihad violence that rarely am I able to post all the news items I’d like to post; time and resources limit the ones I can get to. Whatever I have on Jihad Watch, there is always more jihad. But Hooper, of course, would prefer you didn’t know that.

Egypt, the founding home of the Muslim Brotherhood, has recently declared the MB a terrorist organization and the ex-president of Egypt, long-time MB member Morsi is about to go on trial, along with his cronies, for conspiracy to promote murder, and for illegal dealings with Hamas and Hizbollah that compromised Egypt's sovereignty and security.

People have a mental list of Islamist outrages and the list grows with new Islamist outrages. Yes, perfectly true, which only proves the reasonable basis of our concern about how Islam operates in the world. Rather than proving our concerns to be irrational or xenophobic, Hooper simply validates them.Good plan, Hooper.

“If we follow the rules of interpretation developed from the classical science of Koranic interpretation, it is not possible to condemn terrorism in religious terms. It remains completely true to the classical rules in its evolution of sanctity for its own justification. This is where the secret of its theological strength lies.” — Egyptian scholar Nasr Hamid Abu Zayd

Has the "classical science of Koranic interpretation..." (cough) determined whether you get re-hymenating virgins or white grapes in Paradise after blowing yourself to smithereens ?

"The objective is to make Americans think that any criticism of Islamic texts that jihadis use to incite violence worldwide threatens and endangers Muslims at home who don’t approve of that violence in the first place."

It's such a stupid, shallow, transparent ploy. But it apparently plays, as so called political correctness has turned us into a stupid, shallow transparent people.

Some CAIR honcho a few years back (Hooper?), when repeatedly asked the question, refused to say Hamas & Hezbollah were "terrorist" organizations.

“If a Muslim in a remote village in Pakistan,” he continues, “violates Islamic beliefs by abusing his wife, we will hear about it and about why Islam should be blamed for his actions. Reports on every crime committed by a Muslim are assigned to the faith, whether or not there is even a remote religious connection.”

Somebody needs to tell no so Honest Ibe that that kind of violence goes on in the name of Islam in remote Pakistani villages with some regularity and the formal judicial system in Pakistan can't do jack sh!t about it.

Reading the Koran, one marvels at how obsessed Allah was with regulating and controlling women.

Allah's interest in the problem grew after Mohammed's one wife & financial benefactress Khadija died and Mohammed proceeded to acquire a veritable stable of wives, concubines etc., some 15 in all. Even a Jewess or two, heaven forbid.

CAIR is presenting what is simply a Trojan Horse. The Muslim "problem" is internal and their so-called "religion" is the actual source of "islamophobia." Their intolerance, support of violence, and desire to oppress via sharia "law" is the root cause - not the other way around. Islam is in desperate need of a "reformation" to get it out of the 12th century. Muslims who sit idly by while jihadi's kill and maim are accessories after the fact - silence is tacit support. Nothing less. If they wish to be "accepted" by the civilized world it is they who need to change, not the other way around. When was the last time anyone heard outrage expressed by a mullah or imam after one of their own kills innocents? The answer is never. They need to take a long look at themselves and determine whether or not they want to exist in a modern world. So far their actions have said quite affirmatively the answer is "no."

Needing to "scour" to find radical Islam atrocities is akin to needing to scour Green Bay to find a Packer fan.

You may find an occasional person who isn't interested in NFL football, but you won't find much of anyone who roots against the "home team".

It is beyond disingenuous to suggest that beheadings and blowing up school buses and killing priests and nuns and looking to annihilate Christians and Jews...is "victimhood".

Taking a page from radical leftists...the "victim vs oppressor" con game is unfortunately all too familiar.

Radical Islam isn't a victim of anything other than its own rabid dog insanity. Whether Islam exists in any real form outside of the rabid dog version is becoming increasingly irrelevant. For the proponents of "moderate" Islam to sit in silence while the "home team" takes its rabid dog act on the road, means that they are not rooting against that home team.

Therefore, their "brand" of Islam is a distinction without a meaningful difference.

That Caliphate was actually the Ottoman Empire and they had lost direct control of N. Africa, Egypt and S. Arabia long before WW I. If it had been held together by religion there would've been no need for conquest in the first place. That so-called Caliphate was mostly a chimera used to give the Ottomans a sheen of religious authority.

Yes, I realize the Ottoman Empire lost control of the North Africa region around 1878, but if you look at a Ottoman Empire map prior to 1878 you can see it is almost an exact replica of region 4 of the GATT treaty.

Except for the Balkans, the main religion of the Ottoman Empire was Islam. The United States CFR controlled government, along with NATO turned it's back on a 30 year ally in Egypt for the Muslim Brotherhood. Libya, after the Col. was shot in the head for trying to back his money with gold, was given over to whom? North Africa, Algeria, and now the Arab pagan Holiday of blood in Syria supported by the Muslim Brotherhood.

I don't see how you can miss the similarity Fail Burton. The Muslim Brotherhood wants a united Arab world under Sharia law, and it appears they have sold out to the world system in order to do it. What was/is the cost? One central bank, and one coin tied to the petrol dollar?

Egypt, the founding home of the Muslim Brotherhood, has recently declared the MB a terrorist organization and the ex-president of Egypt, long-time MB member Morsi is about to go on trial, along with his cronies, for conspiracy to promote murder, and for illegal dealings with Hamas and Hizbollah that compromised Egypt's sovereignty and security.

“We will not take seriously criticism from an organization with documented ties to a terrorist organization such as Hamas,” - Stephen Harper, Canadian PM.None of our elected officials in the U.S.A. (that come to mind) come close to having the gonads that the Canadian PM has, when it comes to calling out Muslim treachery and violence. This is the same PM that booted out Iranian diplomats from his country; and here in the U.S.A. we give the Muslim Bruthahood a free pass through our security apparatus. Playing footsie with our enemies was the cause of the Benghazi cluster-frick. We MUST name our enemies, because CAIR (all Islam) and OUR administration are using are own laws against us at every turn .... Lawfare is legitimate jihad.Hooper is a two-bit lightweight thug that has a very cozy relationship with those at the highest levels of our government. How long are we going to tolerate THAT?

If they consider jihad according to their books to be right and good then islamophobia is misplaced. Just because it's wrong to some doesn't make it wrong to everyone.

If beating your wife was ok in western coulture, then wouldn't you get mad when some outside hick tried to tell you it was bad.

The culture is different. Their values are different. They define "innocent people" different than you do. Just because someone is a woman or a child doesn't make them innocent to the jihadis.

What makes sense to you doesn't make sense to them and vise versa. You cannot make a generic values statement and expect everyone to jump on board with you. They have different values than we do.

This is why it is incompatible with the constitution. The constitution was written from the perspective of a certain set of values that they dont share. And this is the reason that will continue to make us incompatible with them.

Unfortunately, the end point of applying 'equal protection' to 'free exercise' gives Islam the key to the world.

Because their 'free exercise' supercedes the Western Rule of Law with that of the Shari'ah, the law of the Qu'ran and Hadiths, which allows them to rape, murder, enslave, do anything they want to the Kaffir.